The importance of cricket punditry

A decade ago, the late Jonathan Rendall wrote a characteristically brilliant piece on the art and development of football punditry. You may think it strange that it's not a subject that has been revisited often since, because television punditry is really football's major voice (and of most sports).

The somewhat dubious "stars" of Rendall's story were Alan Brazil, then as now the mercurial host of Talksport radio's breakfast show, Tony Cascarino, who was trying to climb the greasy pole of punditry and remains an occasional face on television and radio, and Cascarino's friend Andy Townsend, an early adopter of new technology in his "tactics truck", who will soon be leaving a long-standing role at ITV.

Back in 2004, the pundit's qualification for the role was a solid career in the pro game - enough at least for the public to recognise the name. The job was designed to be non-taxing. It entailed either the snap analysis of a slow-motion replay during co-commentary, or sitting in a chair for a superficial scan of the major talking points for a few minutes after a game. Seniority on the pitch manifested itself as seniority in the pundits' chair - men like Alan Hansen and Mark Lawrenson were deferred to, however glib and dismissive their comments.

Ten years on, and the football punditry, driven by Sky's sleek and glistening technology, has had its great leap forwards. Given the time for analysis that dedicated sports channels can offer and the technical brilliance of the match coverage, in which no incident goes unseen (or more accurately unfilmed) men like Gary Neville and Jamie Carragher crouch over giant touchscreens and offer genuine insight into the game. The football pundit's role is becoming so fetishised that the arrival of Thierry Henry to the channel has necessitated a series of soft-focus, slightly creepy TV ads in which the other pundits extol his virtues (no doubt through gritted teeth - it is a competitive field now, with its big money and its hours of screen time).

Cricket punditry is yet to have its big bang moment, but the success of this year's Big Bash League may hasten its arrival. While the full grounds and sense of carnival are the main factors driving the ECB to look again at the feasibility of the T20 Blast, Channel Ten's use of a different style of commentator/pundit has played its role. What's noticeable is the narrowing of the distance between players and public. The odd expletive aside, the on-pitch commentary from Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen has offered a tremendous sense of fun. This is how to make heroes of players.

Up in the commentary box, the oldsters have given way to recently retired men who have experience of the format. While the analysis is not yet revelatory, it is edging that way.

T20 has given the game most of the technical advances it has made in the last decade, and yet, until now, it has been treated as the least serious format. The constant pace of franchise cricket may require a screaming Ravi Shastri or Danny Morrison to keep the energy up, but it's apparent that it deserves more depth too.

In England, Sky's cricket coverage, as technically excellent as its football programming, echoes the ECB view of the game. The Test matches have the gravitas of generations of former England captains. Live T20 games are more informal, but rely on many from the same team. It's when third-party coverage such as Channel Ten's is backed up by studio analysis back in London that some newer voices are heard. Like Flintoff and Pietersen, Steve Harmison, Ravi Bopara and Matt Prior have offered a more nuanced view of what is happening as the T20 game evolves and expands.

Punditry is important. It shapes the language of the game and the way that people new to cricket understand it. Done badly, it emphasises the divide between player and fan. Done well, it reduces it.

Sky have some gems in Mike Atherton, a naturally deep thinker on the game, and the ebullient Ian Ward, who has produced a series of Masterclasses with the likes of Wasim Akram, Ricky Ponting and Brian Lara. The studios are beginning to fill with the kind of gadgets that enable good pundits to unwrap the mysteries of high-level cricket.

T20 is the form that would benefit most from new-style punditry straight from the dressing room. While the ECB fusses about the T20 Blast, its key shop window is the way it's presented on television.

The argument about free-to-air coverage is something of a red herring. Sky penetrates into vast numbers of UK households, and the IPL has been on a free-to-air channel since its inception (it moves to Sky this year). The truly revolutionary move would be to establish a free online streaming channel, perhaps with Sky's co-operation, because that's where most kids get their content. They are the pay-channel customers of the future, after all.

But what they watch is just as important. Punditry may have started out as a bit of televisual fluff but it now has the lead role is shaping perceptions of the sport. In T20 at least, it needs to match the speed at which the game is advancing, building understanding and bridging the gaps between them and us. Right now, T20 needs its Gary Neville moment.